Skip to main content

About your Search

20100912
20100912
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
with a recommendation. supervisor chu: the item is before us. i believe we will need a roll call. before we do that, i want to thank supervisor alioto-pier for her leadership in bringing this item forward and bringing people together today in this room. i also want to take a minute to thank people on both sides have come here to share your experiences. it has been very educational to hear about your experiences. i want to say thank you for that. the other thing that is very interesting in this room is as i listened to testimony on both sides, i think both of you are right. i do think in terms of voluntary services and treatment programs that those are probably the most effective programs when people do want and are part of the solution and believe they have a say in their treatment. i also agree with the other side in the sense that sometimes there is a need for a bit more. there is a need for some additional help. what has been compelling to me is the testimony from ms. lacey, a professional in this industry for many years who has worked in the behavioral courts who has seen firsthand what the court
very, very bleak, and it occurred to me and all of us there that if this is true, we all have to get together and come up with new sources of income instead of taxing your own revenue sources out of business entirely. thanks it. thanks. supervisor avalos: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is james robinson. my wife and i own a small wine shop here in the city. and we talked today about the targeting of big alcohol, but i think in reality the trickle down is going to hurt everyone in the chain below, big alcohol. we talked about price sensitivity today. three cents, five cents per glass. it doesn't sound like much but the true cost will realistically be much, much higher under the current three-tier alcohol distribution system. we talked about the impact on new payroll which could lead to further job losses here in the city. and i truly believe we need to do everything we can to stimulate job creations. the end result it seems that we would be steering business away from san francisco metro area. and we've got too many empty storefronts already t
for every $1 spent on prevention. clearly they were acting out all litigation in san francisco, using a portion of those funds to save money in the long run. an ounce of prevention is worth 1 pound of cure. i ask you to seriously consider passing the mitigation fee, not only to deal with the costs of excessive alcohol consumption, but two events -- invest in efforts that will have a larger held down the road. supervisor avalos: -- larger help down the road. supervisor avalos: next speaker. >> we are in a tenuous position in coming out of this large recession, trying to encourage our patrons back. we have cut our prices to try to keep customers. this legislation, from the controller who i would like to thank from his insights, said that there would be a $13 million trickle-down impact on the businesses. i would like you to know that this impact will end with the loss of business and our customers. will impact my employees with a loss of shifts and jobs and possibilities of closing one or more of my location's. i would like to encourage you to vote no on this of all legislation. thank y
for recovery. this is about choice, independence, giving people the opportunity to use a lot of the services we currently have that they do not qualify for because they have not committed a crime. we have all of these city services but the only way to reach them is to break the law. with laura's law, we're opening up the services so that people can use them and take advantage of them without having to go to jail first. [applause] supervisor chu: i would like to ask the crowd to refrain from applause. i would like to finish a public comment. supervisor avalos: there are a lot of services the city provides that could get people into treatment that are not mandated. people can access them at various points. they can access it through police officers, resource centers, a formal network. they can get access to services. there are ways to get people involved in treatment in the city. the city has a broad array of those services. that is compared to nevada county, especially. they're concentrated around the city and allow for greater access than laura's law would create. i do not think it is an apples
of assisted outpatient treatment in the city and county of san francisco. the resolution will allow us to begin the necessary steps in coordination with city departments and the court to allow for a system outpatient treatment to the most seriously mentally ill who are unable or unwilling to accept treatment. first, i would like to thank supervisor avalos and the budget committee for restoring mental health funding. state law requires counties that implement lauras lot to fully fund a voluntary services. my hope is we can adopt this resolution along with the budget to improve -- or parts of the budget to improve the outcome for mentally ill individuals and reduce costs related to law enforcement and emergency services. the presiding judge of the viscounty stated, implementing laura's law is actually very simple. the benefit to cost ratio is all on the benefit side. the human benefits are huge, both to the consumer and the community. the cost is small and the savings are immense. as i stated at the hearing, we can look at new york where a simple law -- similar law had been fully impleme
types of alcohol, it would be easier for us to apply that fee without taking into account the different ways that alcohol can be manufactured and make it easier for the tax collector to do the work and businesses to report on their sales. the amendments, we allowed this hearing to consider the amendments and are facing a timeline based on prop. 26, which is on the november ballot. prop 26, if it were to pass, would prevent the municipalities and state government from creating any fees in the future unless they had two-thirds of the public or the electorate. you might think that that helps to yield fiscal accountability in the county's, but it might also severely hamstring local governments from making decisions about their finances. today, primarily we have it open for public comments. everyone that wishes to speak will be allowed to speak on the measure. i will be asking my colleagues to move this item forward to the september 7 board meeting. it will be the first one after our recess. i will be around after this week for the month of august to take in concerns. there has been a discus
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6